Agenda item

The Executive Response to the recommendations made by the Task Group on Worker Exploitation will be considered by the Commission.

The Executive Response to the recommendations made by the Task Group on Worker Exploitation was considered by the Commission. 

Professor Nik Hammer of the University of Leicester attended the meeting to assist with the discussion.

The Director of Tourism, Culture and Economy made the following points:

• Members and Professor Hammer were thanked for their work on the task force.
• It was noted that exploitation was not an issue exclusive to Leicester, and Local Authorities did not have a formal role in Labour Market enforcement.  However work could be done when resources were available to focus on particular sectors such as the garment industry.
• The UK Director of Labour market Enforcement had published independent review of Operation Tacit (OpTacit) which had noted that allegations of widespread exploitation in the garment Leicester had been unfounded.
• The Task Group had looked at where exploitation was likely to be prevalent in a city such as Leicester.
• There had been a change in national policy on labour market enforcement with the pending establishment of the Fair Work Agency.  The city had experienced first-hand the fragmented nature of the enforcement landscape in coordinating activity, so it was good that this was being brought together. The establishment of the Fair Work Agency would be tracked.
• Partnerships on the labour market had been developed over the past year. As part of the Get Leicester, Leicestershire and Rutland (LLR) Working Plan, new and existing partners had been engaged around this agenda. 
• This presented opportunities to work with partners in communities to help get people into work, and through this there could be opportunities to raise awareness of workers’ rights.
• The task force had also identified sectors in which exploitation was more likely to be prevalent such as in social care and in the ‘gig-economy’ (such as delivery drivers).  These could be areas on which to focus efforts, subject to funding.
• The Local Authority had influence on procurement to drive employment standards, which was delivered via the Social Value Charter.

The Chair summarised the recommendations made by the task group as set out in the report.

In discussions with Members, the following was noted:

• In response to a query regarding overseas workers in social care, it was noted that the task group had received witness statements from the Adult Social Care (ASC) department and they had highlighted some issues that they were aware of in residential homes.  It was noted that work had been done with care workers from overseas to ensure that they were fulfilling their criteria with regard to Work Permits and meetings had been held with care workers to ensure that they understood what was required of them.
• With regard to routes on commissioning in social care, evidence had come from Council colleagues.  There was a challenge to support people in employed by other providers, even if conditions in Council services were above board.
• In terms of education on workers’ rights, it was noted that national enforcement bodies had run programmes to raise awareness of rights and how to report issues.  Specific programmes had been commissioned to raise awareness of workers’ rights in the textiles sector. 
• It was noted that one of the recommendations of the task force had been to develop information campaigns. Jobs fairs could create opportunities for enforcement bodies to engage with local people. 
• It was important not to forget about the garment sector, but it was also necessary to recognise that allegations against the sector had damaged the industry as well as damaging the view of Leicester as a manufacturing base for textiles and this had impacted on orders being placed with local manufacturers, which has a knock on impact for local workers.
• The organisation Fashion Enter had been supported to establish the Fashion Hub in the city centre, and they have been delivering skills programmes for the sector.
• A Leicester Made industry trade event had been held at Athena last year, at which many manufacturers and brands had attended, which focussed on the textiles sector and the need to grow it further.  The focus needed to be on the future and positive jobs and employment. 
• It was noted that the Commission had been told that many jobs in the textiles sector had gone abroad, whereas the focus of the task group was on the labour market in Leicester.
• In response to points raised about other areas such as construction and small businesses and the need for corporate businesses to be part of the approach, it was noted that the way different sectors were organised was different and the issues were very complex.
• Responding to points made about apprenticeships, it was noted that the Local Authority created and promoted apprenticeship opportunities
• Responding to points made about journalistic investigations into exploitation in the garment sector, it was acknowledged that exploitation had taken place, but Leicester was not exceptional in this respect, as per the findings of the OpTacit report.
• The evidence of the OpTacit report had been looked at, as well as the evidence presented to the task force on where exploitation may be prevalent.  The task force had not discounted exploitation in textiles, but had looked at where it may be more prevalent and had been evidence-based wherever possible.
• Points were raised about the comparison in evidence needed for a criminal prosecution compared to a journalistic investigation.
• It was noted that there was a wide spectrum of exploitation, and it was necessary to understand that many citizens worked in fields where these problems existed and it was necessary to think about how the Council could assist.
• It was further noted that people may be reluctant to report exploitation but may instead approach trusted voluntary sector organisations regarding matters such as income or health.
• It would be necessary to see how the Fair Work Agency evolved.
• With regard for the need for finances and resources to support this work, the Local Government Association (LGA) had undertaken work on Modern Slavery and had asked the government that national ambitions be matched with local resources.  There were nine modern slavery coordinators across the country and the LGA had asked that these be funded across all Councils
• Worker exploitation could be considered as part of the Get LLR Working agenda as this will provide a framework to bring partners together. Get LLR Working was not primarily focused on this agenda as it was about getting people into work, however, in the agenda there was a requirement to build collaborative partnerships on the labour market, including with health partners, voluntary organisations, universities and other Local Authorities.  Rather than having different partnership groups funded by short-term funding, it may be possible to draw in stakeholder partners that wished to engage with local communities on workers’ rights.  Partners could be invited into this agenda, which could include data gathering to understand the wider picture of the labour market.
• Looking again at the issue of resources, there was a broader issue around Local Government Reorganisation (LGR) and devolution whereby devolved funding could be provided by the government.  If authorities were fully devolved, they could receive powers and resources to deal with local affairs. 

AGREED:

1)    That the response be noted.

2)    That comments made by members of this commission to be taken into account.

3)    That further updates on progress be reported to the Commission.